Regeneron Seeks Emergency Approval per trump’s miracle recovery and subsequent endorsement. Biotech company Regeneron moved Wednesday to apply for emergency approval for an experimental antibody treatment praised by President Trump. “Subsequent to our discussions with regulatory authorities, we have submitted a request to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for our REGN-COV2 investigational antibody combination for COVID-19.” And trump? President Donald Trump received the antibody cocktail last Friday along with other drugs under a compassionate use program after becoming sick(?) with the coronavirus. Trump hailed Regeneron’s treatment in a video posted on Twitter Wednesday, saying he would authorize its
Topics:
run75441 considers the following as important: Healthcare, law, politics, US EConomics
This could be interesting, too:
Peter Radford writes Election: Take Four
Joel Eissenberg writes Diversity in healthcare delivery
Angry Bear writes Heathcare Insurance Companies Abandoning Medicare Advantage
NewDealdemocrat writes New Deal democrats Weekly Indicators for November 11 – 15
Regeneron Seeks Emergency Approval per trump’s miracle recovery and subsequent endorsement.
Biotech company Regeneron moved Wednesday to apply for emergency approval for an experimental antibody treatment praised by President Trump.
“Subsequent to our discussions with regulatory authorities, we have submitted a request to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for our REGN-COV2 investigational antibody combination for COVID-19.”
And trump? President Donald Trump received the antibody cocktail last Friday along with other drugs under a compassionate use program after becoming sick(?) with the coronavirus. Trump hailed Regeneron’s treatment in a video posted on Twitter Wednesday, saying he would authorize its emergency use and make it available to Americans for free.
Who knew this was a clinical trial of the real drug? What if it was a placebo and he cured himself? If they approve this after all the hoopla over other drugs . . .
Just more deflection from the real issues, the pandemic, himself, etc.
A 4–3 party-line vote and Republican judges on the Michigan Supreme Court invalidated a law that had empowered a historically popular Democratic chief executive to take emergency actions to combat COVID-19. The basis for the decision was an antiquated doctrine that conservatives on the United States Supreme Court have signaled they want to revive.
The Michigan Supreme Court was following the lead of the U.S. Supreme Court. In an opinion last year, Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote a dissent calling for the revival of the nondelegation doctrine. Gorsuch premised his argument on the originalist claim the Framers believed “such delegation of power, in the case emergency powers, would frustrate ‘the system of government ordained by the Constitution’ if Congress could merely announce vague aspirations and then assign others the responsibility of adopting legislation to realize its goals.”
Legislatures aren’t equipped to resolve every question for themselves. Nor are they nimble enough to confront every new challenge as it arises. Sometimes, they need to draw on the executive branch’s expertise and dispatch. And in this case, the Michigan legislature through Gerrymandering has had control of the legislature since 1990. They have the ability to overrule the governor.
Courts Are Taking Away One of Americans’ Best Options for Fixing Voting
In 2019, writing the decision for Common Cause v. Rucho, Chief Justice John Roberts closed off the federal courts as an avenue for addressing partisan gerrymandering. But, Roberts insisted, the Supreme Court’s decision did not condone these excesses. Rather, another path for addressing structural electoral reform existed. Noting the success of several citizen-driven state-constitutional amendments passed by ballot in Colorado, Michigan, and Missouri the previous November, Roberts said that citizens still had the tools to make change.
Just over a year later, however, that hasn’t proved to be the case.
Voters in Arkansas, North Dakota, and Idaho took Roberts up on his suggestion to drive reform via citizen-led initiative or by amending their state constitution. In Arkansas, with two different amendments, citizens worked to establish an independent redistricting commission and also open primaries and institute ranked-choice voting. In North Dakota, they looked to strengthen overseas-military voting and election audits, open primaries to all voters, and enact instant runoffs. Idaho voters, meanwhile, sought to expand funding for public education. One by one, these initiatives have been knocked off the ballots this summer by state and federal courts, and for the most tendentious and technical reasons.
Voters in Arkansas, North Dakota, and Idaho took Roberts up on his suggestion to drive reform via citizen-led initiative or by amending their state constitution. In Arkansas, with two different amendments, citizens worked to establish an independent redistricting commission and also open primaries and institute ranked-choice voting. In North Dakota, they looked to strengthen overseas-military voting and election audits, open primaries to all voters, and enact instant runoffs. Idaho voters, meanwhile, sought to expand funding for public education. One by one, these initiatives have been knocked off the ballots this summer by state and federal courts, and for the most tendentious and technical reasons.